GIND vs. AAAU

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

GIND (Goldman Sachs India Equity ETF) and AAAU (Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GIND is a Asia Pacific Equities fund actively managed by Goldman Sachs, while AAAU is a Precious Metals fund tracking the LBMA Gold PM Price. GIND is actively managed, while AAAU is passively managed. Over the past year, GIND returned -13.74% vs 32.29% for AAAU. At a 0.19 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GIND charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.18%/yr for AAAU.

Performance

GIND vs. AAAU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs India Equity ETF (GIND) and Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF (AAAU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GIND achieves a -12.46% return, which is significantly lower than AAAU's 2.94% return.

GIND

• 1D: -1.57%
• 1M: -2.39%
• YTD: -12.46%
• 6M: -11.52%
• 1Y: -13.74%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

AAAU

• 1D: -1.02%
• 1M: -1.68%
• YTD: 2.94%
• 6M: 5.50%
• 1Y: 32.29%
• 3Y*: 31.37%
• 5Y*: 18.39%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GIND vs. AAAU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
GIND Goldman Sachs India Equity ETF	-12.46%	4.55%
AAAU Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF	2.94%	38.55%

Correlation

The correlation between GIND and AAAU is 0.16, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.16
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 4, 2025	0.19

GIND vs. AAAU - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GIND	AAAU
Financial Services	28.9%	-
Consumer Cyclical	15.9%	-
Industrials	10.7%	-
Basic Materials	9.2%	-
Technology	9.0%	-
Healthcare	8.8%	-
Consumer Defensive	5.7%	-
Energy	4.1%	-
Utilities	2.9%	-
Communication Services	2.8%	-
Real Estate	2.2%	100.0%

Return for Risk

GIND vs. AAAU — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

GIND

GIND Risk / Return Rank: 3
GIND Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
GIND Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
GIND Omega Ratio Rank: 3
GIND Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
GIND Martin Ratio Rank: 1

AAAU

AAAU Risk / Return Rank: 32
AAAU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
AAAU Sortino Ratio Rank: 29
AAAU Omega Ratio Rank: 36
AAAU Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
AAAU Martin Ratio Rank: 29

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

GIND vs. AAAU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs India Equity ETF (GIND) and Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF (AAAU). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

	GIND	AAAU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.85	1.23	-2.08
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.18	1.63	-2.81
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.87	1.25	-0.38
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.60	1.70	-2.30
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.45	4.21	-5.66
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GIND vs. AAAU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GIND Sharpe Ratio is -0.85, which is lower than the AAAU Sharpe Ratio of 1.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GIND and AAAU, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	GIND	AAAU	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.85	1.23	-2.08
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	1.04	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.43	1.09	-1.52

Drawdowns

GIND vs. AAAU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GIND drawdown since its inception was -22.97%, which is greater than AAAU's maximum drawdown of -21.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GIND and AAAU.

Drawdown Indicators

	GIND	AAAU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.97%	-21.63%	-1.34%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-22.97%	-19.13%	-3.84%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-19.13%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-20.94%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-17.00%	-17.68%	+0.68%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.85%	-6.18%	-0.67%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.52%	7.69%	+1.83%

Volatility

GIND vs. AAAU - Volatility Comparison

Goldman Sachs India Equity ETF (GIND) has a higher volatility of 5.81% compared to Goldman Sachs Physical Gold ETF (AAAU) at 5.50%. This indicates that GIND's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AAAU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GIND	AAAU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.81%	5.50%	+0.31%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.04%	22.94%	-8.90%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.24%	26.33%	-10.09%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.14%	17.83%	-0.69%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.14%	16.99%	+0.15%

GIND vs. AAAU - Expense Ratio Comparison

GIND has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than AAAU's 0.18% expense ratio.

Dividends

GIND vs. AAAU - Dividend Comparison

Neither GIND nor AAAU has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GIND and AAAU in my portfolio?

GIND and AAAU have a correlation of 0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GIND or AAAU?

GIND has higher volatility (5.81%) compared to AAAU (5.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GIND dropped -22.97% vs AAAU's -21.63%.

Which ETF is better, GIND or AAAU?

On 1-year performance, AAAU leads with 32.29% vs -13.74% for GIND. On fees, AAAU is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, AAAU has been the lower-risk option at 5.50%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GIND or AAAU?

Over the 1-year period, AAAU has performed better with a 32.29% return vs -13.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GIND or AAAU?

AAAU is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GIND.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GIND or AAAU?

GIND and AAAU have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between GIND and AAAU?

GIND is categorized as Asia Pacific Equities, while AAAU is Precious Metals. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for GIND and 0.18% for AAAU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AAAU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.23 vs -0.85), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.